Home » Darwinism » “Making a Monkey out of Darwin,” by Patrick Buchanan

“Making a Monkey out of Darwin,” by Patrick Buchanan

June 30, 2009 Posted by William Dembski under Darwinism
136 Comments

It’s nice to see people like Pat Buchanan feeling more at ease about going after Darwin. In citing Eugene Windchy’s THE END OF DARWINISM, Buchanan writes:

Darwin … lied in “The Origin of Species” about believing in a Creator. By 1859, he was a confirmed agnostic and so admitted in his posthumous autobiography, which was censored by his family.

SOURCE: worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=102589

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

136 Responses to “Making a Monkey out of Darwin,” by Patrick Buchanan

1 2 3 4
  1. 91
    JTaylorJuly 2, 2009 at 11:05 pm

    Clive: “That’s a designation of race, which is, quite honestly, racism. He says that they are a unique group.”

    Let’s go back to the dictionary definitions.

    1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
    2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
    3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

    Clive – which of the characteristics that I’ve bolded does Lewontin exhibit in his paper? All, some or none?

  2. 92
    KRiS_CensoredJuly 2, 2009 at 11:30 pm

    David:

    Appearance is paramount here. If something appears one way, then it is necessarily that way. Life appears designed, therefore it is necessarily designed. Aboriginals appears unique, therefore they are necessarily unique. Appearance is necessarily reality, and so your claim that appearance is not so appears to be nonsensical…therefore, it is necessarily nonsensical.

  3. 93
    David KelloggJuly 3, 2009 at 12:32 am

    “I also see what’s really there”

    As opposed to what appears to be there?

    Seriously, if there were a disease that significantly affected a population group — say, Australian aborigines — you would not want to know about that because it’s a difference, therefore racist?

  4. 94
    David KelloggJuly 3, 2009 at 12:33 am

    The quote in the previous post was from Clive, who buys the appearance/reality duality when it suits him and dismisses it when it does not.

  5. 95
    dbthomasJuly 3, 2009 at 1:19 am

    KRiS_Censored:
    As the late Ed McMahon was said to have said: “You are correct, sir!”

    Par example:

    The Sun appears to revolve about a stationary Earth. The stars appear to rotate through the night sky. The Earth itself appears to be flat. A number of insects appear to spontaneously generate from dead flesh. David Copperfield apparently made the Statue Of Liberty disappear one time.

    I must bow to inexorable logic, and so I am now a confirmed flat-earther, geocentrist, Aristotelian, and am deeply, deeply afraid of Mr. Copperfield’s vast sorcerous powers.

  6. 96
    KRiS_CensoredJuly 3, 2009 at 2:14 am

    dbthomas:

    lol. I hope you’re not trying to mock me :)

    I always forget about Poe’s Law and that I need to unambiguously state when I’m making an intentionally absurd point.

    And of course, I hope it’s not a case where you’re intentionally taking me too seriously to continue the parody and I’m taking you too seriously in return.

    Poe’s Law can be confusing enough without second and third order parodies popping up.

  7. 97
    dbthomasJuly 3, 2009 at 2:34 am

    KRiS_Censored:

    And of course, I hope it’s not a case where you’re intentionally taking me too seriously to continue the parody and I’m taking you too seriously in return.

    Yeah, that one. Maybe the W3C can standardize a tag for parody/satire, or sites can make good use of javascript’s rollover event so we can just keep these things running indefinitely.

  8. 98
    David KelloggJuly 3, 2009 at 7:50 am

    As Erasmus write at the Site Which Shall Not Be Named, Clive is essentially arguing that names make you racist.

    Clive, again: suppose a group (say, Australian aborigines) has a strong susceptibility to a disease. Does noticing that make you racist?

  9. 99
    Echidna-LevyJuly 3, 2009 at 8:35 am

    Clive

    Modern day phrenology isn’t going to dispel racism.

    What does Intelligent Design have to say about race and racism?

    Anything at all?

  10. 100
    sparcJuly 3, 2009 at 11:15 am

    Clive

    Anything that describes things on the bodily level is bound to separate into races if one wants to see it that way, even on a genetic level as Lewontin shows, which is why I prefer a qualitative measurement, like the soul endowed by their Creator, (which cannot be a quantitative measurement), to dispel the notion of race. Quantitative measurements won’t do it.

    Then you may be interested in interested in Warda and Hans recent paper “Mitochondria, the missing link between body and soul: Proteomic prospective evidence”.

  11. 101
    sparcJuly 3, 2009 at 11:53 pm

    From Warda and Han’s paper:

    Alternatively, instead of sinking in a swamp of endless debates about the evolution of mitochondria, it is better to come up with a unified assumption that all living cells undergo a certain degree of convergence or divergence to or from each other to meet their survival in specific habitats. Proteomics data greatly assist this realistic assumption that connects all kinds of life. More logically, the points that show proteomics overlapping between different forms of life are more likely to be interpreted as a reflection of a single common fingerprint initiated by a mighty creator than relying on a single cell that is, in a doubtful way, surprisingly originating all other kinds of life.

  12. 102
    sparcJuly 4, 2009 at 12:20 am

    They further note:

    Many controversial questions still need to be answered, e.g., how signaling molecules and other proteomics candidates, with relative low abundance, precisely translocate from or to mitochondria in a matter of milliseconds while crossing a huge ocean of soluble and insoluble barriers. And more importantly, how such molecules further selectively bind their targets to provoke their tidy streaming cascades. The answer could be the contribution of cytoskeleton proteins or the presence of specific carriers or even pH changes etc. This might be true, but we still need to know the secret behind this disciplined organized wisdom.

    They conclude

    We realize so far that mitochondria could be the link between the body and this preserved wisdom of the soul devoted to guaranteeing life.

  13. 103
    jerryJuly 4, 2009 at 12:21 am

    “You missed David’s point.”

    I didn’t miss David’s point. This absurdness has been covered several times before in the last couple years and I am quite familiar with the arguments. By pointing to one instance or a set of instances does not mean that there isn’t a direction going on for a lot of life.

    If someone disagrees then they should ponder that as they type a response in their computer. You represent a direction. And just because the road of life has a lot of dead ends or cul de sacs it does not mean there are not a lot of long winding roads that are still heading off into the sunset.

  14. 104
    djmullenJuly 6, 2009 at 5:15 am

    Clive, I see you deleted what would have been message #128. Would you mind telling me what you objected to in that message?

    • 104.1
      Clive HaydenJuly 6, 2009 at 10:48 am

      djmullen,

      To be honest, I don’t remember the content exactly. I read a lot of comments, and the normal criteria applies to all of them, so I recollect that it was offensive or vilifying or rude in some manner.

  15. 105
    CabalJuly 6, 2009 at 11:31 am

    FWIMBW:

    http://www.isteve.com/2001_ken.....urture.htm

1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply